[governance] IGF and Enhanced Cooperation
Avri Doria
avri at ella.com
Mon May 28 11:21:29 EDT 2012
Dear MAG member,
why no support for at least a workshop at IGF12?
avri
On 28 May 2012, at 11:12, Anriette Esterhuysen wrote:
> Yes... let's do the pre-event in Baku. APC is willing to lead on this
> but we are talking to others to co-convene.
>
> And then let's get the 2013 IGF to feature various aspects of EC much
> more prominently. IGF 2013 will be hosted in a developing country
> (Indonesia) and it is therefore likely to have far greater developing
> country government participation (at least from Asian and African
> countries).
>
> Also by then quite a lot would have happened at CSTD/ECOSOC/UNGA level
> (and WCIT) as well as inside some of the existing institutions. E.g. the
> assessments, report cards, mapping and other suggestions made on the
> 18th of May.
>
> Anriette
>
>
> On 28/05/2012 16:37, Avri Doria wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> Personally I think we need to keep pushing for something during IGF2012.
>>
>> Let's go into WCIT with the IGF having made room for the problem and having started the process. We have 5 months yet before the meeting, things can't possibly be set in stone at this point. We have a new MAG that was forced to accept a program they were not completely comfortable with, they are entitled to still be thinking about how to make IGF12 as valuable as they possibly can. (Not that I have the faintest idea of whether they would be interested in taking such action)
>>
>> And whether we can get it into the IGF12 agenda, which I think its the optimal solution, or not, I think the idea that Anriette mentioned on the list earlier:
>>
>>
>> On 27 May 2012, at 11:22, Anriette Esterhuysen wrote:
>>
>>> Dear Avri
>>>
>>> We definitely must use the IGF and APC is already thinking of planning a
>>> pre-event on this. Not finalised.. and we are talking to various
>>> partners.. but I feel strongly we must facilitate substantive dialogue.
>>>
>>> The IGF was set up to facilitate such discussions. Some people tried to
>>> prevent this from happening. I think they now realise that a) they might
>>> have been wrong and/or b) further avoidance is not in the interest of
>>> the IGF or of multi-stakeholder participation in IG.
>>>
>>> Anriette
>>
>> Perhaps since 71 puts the responsibility on the relevant organizations (which I take to mean the mangers of critical Internet resources) to get this underway: "Relevant organizations should commence a process towards enhanced cooperation involving all stakeholders", it won't be to hard to find a set of good sponsors for such an event.
>>
>> But to be clear. I would like to see both a full day pre-event discussion, and for that event to bring a report (dare i say recommendations?) to the IGF in a workshop arranged for discussion of EC and the IGF.
>>
>> avri
>>
>>
>>
>> On 28 May 2012, at 10:18, Adam Peake wrote:
>>
>>> Anriette, thanks.
>>>
>>> Doesn't make sense to me, but nevermind :-)
>>>
>>> So what next? Enhanced cooperation on the agenda of IGF 2013? I'd
>>> support that.
>>>
>>> Adam
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>> Hi Adam
>>>>
>>>> We actually checked with one of the authors recently... and she said
>>>> that was exactly what she remembers intending the text to say (Avri's
>>>> interpretation).
>>>>
>>>> Anriette
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On 28/05/2012 15:35, Adam Peake wrote:
>>>>>> Agree completely with this logical sequential interpretation by Avri.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> I agree with the logic, but as mentioned, don't think the document was
>>>>> drafted with that in mind, those last hours were a mess and this was the
>>>>> text that was being worked on. But I wasn't the only one on the room
>>>>> and my memory is terrible!
>>>>>
>>>>> I read 71 and 72 as separate. If they'd intended to be linked there
>>>>> would be text saying so, there would be some connecting language
>>>>> (furthermore...), and the mandate of the IGF would include a reference
>>>>> to enhanced cooperation. The mandate's very clear, a to l. Wish I could
>>>>> remember if this was discussed in Tunis.
>>>>>
>>>>> And also Nitin decided it for us. Both paragraphs ask the secretary
>>>>> general to do something, Nitin as the special advisor for Internet
>>>>> governance said separate and I guess that's him speaking for the SG. So
>>>>> if they are to be linked now it would be the SG or his proxy that does it.
>>>>>
>>>>> Adam
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>> Anriette
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On 28/05/2012 15:10, Avri Doria wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On 28 May 2012, at 02:23, Andrea Glorioso wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Leaving aside for a moment the subsequent UNGA resolution on the
>>>>>>>> matter (but noting that even though, strictly speaking, we are not
>>>>>>>> talking about binding international law, the principle of "lex
>>>>>>>> posterior" could apply) I would be curious to know your views on
>>>>>>>> which passages of the WSIS texts could lead to such conclusion.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I think I may have already sent this to this list at some point, but
>>>>>>> it bears repeating often.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> In terms of my personal opinion, I think the Tunis Agenda actually
>>>>>>> places responsiblity for the Enhanced Cooperation with the Forum.
>>>>>>> As I read the Tunis Agenda text,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> - 67 calls for a forum in a general sense,
>>>>>>> - 68 calls for the equal participation of governments,
>>>>>>> - 69 call for enhanced cooperation
>>>>>>> - 70 calls for the participation of existing IG organizations and
>>>>>>> creation of principles,
>>>>>>> - 71 calls for UNSG initiation of a multistakeholder process on
>>>>>>> enhanced cooperation with yearly status reports and
>>>>>>> - 72 defines the forum called for in 67.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> In other words the entire discussion is bracketed by the notion of a
>>>>>>> forum. It is called for, it is described, one task is brought out
>>>>>>> more than any other, and then they get into the nitty gritty of the
>>>>>>> forum called for in 67. In any case it is certain that the TA called
>>>>>>> for the process of EC, whether we argue it is in or out of the
>>>>>>> context of the IGF, that it must also be a multistakeholder process:
>>>>>>> from 71: "... should commence a process towards enhanced cooperation
>>>>>>> involving all stakeholders,"
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> avri
>>>>>>
>>>>>> --
>>>>>> ------------------------------------------------------
>>>>>> anriette esterhuysen anriette at apc.org
>>>>>> executive director, association for progressive communications
>>>>>> www.apc.org
>>>>>> po box 29755, melville 2109
>>>>>> south africa
>>>>>> tel/fax +27 11 726 1692
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> ____________________________________________________________
>>>>>> You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
>>>>>> governance at lists.igcaucus.org
>>>>>> To be removed from the list, visit:
>>>>>> http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing
>>>>>>
>>>>>> For all other list information and functions, see:
>>>>>> http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance
>>>>>> To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:
>>>>>> http://www.igcaucus.org/
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> ------------------------------------------------------
>>>> anriette esterhuysen anriette at apc.org
>>>> executive director, association for progressive communications
>>>> www.apc.org
>>>> po box 29755, melville 2109
>>>> south africa
>>>> tel/fax +27 11 726 1692
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> ____________________________________________________________
>>>> You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
>>>> governance at lists.igcaucus.org
>>>> To be removed from the list, visit:
>>>> http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing
>>>>
>>>> For all other list information and functions, see:
>>>> http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance
>>>> To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:
>>>> http://www.igcaucus.org/
>>>>
>>>> Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t
>>>
>>>
>>> ____________________________________________________________
>>> You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
>>> governance at lists.igcaucus.org
>>> To be removed from the list, visit:
>>> http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing
>>>
>>> For all other list information and functions, see:
>>> http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance
>>> To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:
>>> http://www.igcaucus.org/
>>>
>>> Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t
>>
>>
>
> --
> ------------------------------------------------------
> anriette esterhuysen anriette at apc.org
> executive director, association for progressive communications
> www.apc.org
> po box 29755, melville 2109
> south africa
> tel/fax +27 11 726 1692
>
> ____________________________________________________________
> You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
> governance at lists.igcaucus.org
> To be removed from the list, visit:
> http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing
>
> For all other list information and functions, see:
> http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance
> To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:
> http://www.igcaucus.org/
>
> Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t
-------------- next part --------------
____________________________________________________________
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
governance at lists.igcaucus.org
To be removed from the list, visit:
http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing
For all other list information and functions, see:
http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance
To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:
http://www.igcaucus.org/
Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t
More information about the Governance
mailing list